Dr. Strangelove

Posting tweets from a Russian agent, very on brand.

This is why I teased you about your inability to see the obvious - and I do mean OBVIOUS. We're not saying the drug killed them. We're saying taking a drug with the incorrect belief that it was helpful caused the course of their disease to be worse than it otherwise would've been because they're less likely to take actual helpful measures. How many unvaxxed people met with their family's for a BBQ believing that because they were taking Ivermectin, they were safe? How many refused to go to the hospital? How many after going to the hospital demanded Ivermectin in lieu of actual treatments? THOUSANDS. For the last time - the danger isn't the drug itself - its the incorrect belief in the drug protecting you from a very harmful disease.

You believe there's a distinct difference because that person believes in something obviously untrue. But to them, it's obvious it is true. Your belief in Ivermectin is no different, other than your belief is far more nefarious and dangerous. An untold number of people died believing in ineffective treatments, Ivermectin included. That's not difficult to see for anybody outside your belief system - but just like my crazy neighbor - you've shaped your reality to brush off the obvious contradictory evidence to your belief system.

I equated people making up their own reality and living in it despite factual evidence and their inability to believe in facts that disagree with their world view. To you, that person is crazy. But that person strongly believes that Michelle Obama has a wang. Their conviction to that false reality is as strong as your conviction to yours.

Hey man, you're the one peddling some ineffective treatment based on talking points pushed by the Right that serves to sow distrust in our institutions (vaccines included) which has led to the unnecessary deaths of thousands of people. You do you my dude.

Reading the responses to @Redux and other conservative members of this board reminds me of my neighbor who looked me in the eye and told me that Lady Gaga was a satanic pedophile and Michelle Obama was a man. Some people live in their own reality. No amount of explaining that the real danger of promoting ineffective treatments is not from the drug but from the disease they're likely to get is going to change that.

A perfect lesson of somebody who desperately wants something to be true so badly they warp their reality to make it true. I can't believe I have to explain this, but doctors should not prescribe or treat a disease with anything that doesn't work, even if it's not harmful. Do you know why doctors don't prescribe Ibuprofen to treat cancer? Because it doesn't work. The harm comes not from the drug, but from the course of the disease a patient thinks is being treated by said drug. How many people do you think died because they thought Ivermectin was a substitute for the vaccine? To be noted, like I told @knapplc, I really don't care. If somebody is stupid and wants to die, let them.

Bold of you to think that this will pierce the echo chamber the alternate reality Republicans live in. At this point, if somebody wants to take Ivermectin to treat COVID, let them. It's their own idiotic choice to harm themselves, no different than smoking or a host of other things.

The Republicans should honestly just see how far they can push the grift with their own voters. It's kind of entertaining to watch the party rack up criminal charges and have people vote for them anyway.

Yeah, I mean, if your political party is divorced from reality, why solve actual problems like climate change when you can make up fake problems that your voters are gullible enough to believe in?

Sadly there's nothing we can do to stop Republicans. Let's hope they don't accidentally invade a country and illegally torture innocent civilians this time. Wait, that's when Republicans were 'sane'. Let's hope they don't legislate their way to a permanent majority like they've done to Wisconsin, thus ending the great American experiment of liberal democracy? Oh well, at least we won't have to worry about CRT.

You might as well shout into the void. They're simply only going to believe what confirms their world view. Reality be damned.

HahahahHhaAhaha. Oh man. Libertarians are the best. You say this posting on the internet regulated by the FCC, you drive on roads managed by the Department of Transportation, protected by a well funded police force, in a house/apartment with water managed by your local water department, likely living in a state who's economy depends heavily on various government subsidies,where employees are protected by OSHA, eating food monitored by the FDA, using a cell phone service facilitated by the FCC, who's bank account is protected by the FDIC, and you're very likely to have attended a publically funded school and you're retirement is at least partially taken care of through the SSA. I could go on all day. I really, truly wish we could give voters like you exactly what you want. I mean, I get that some regulations are frustrating, but people really have no idea how freaking great we have it living in the United States.

This is so incredibly false that it's not worth taking to you about it because you want to believe it's true.

Another GOP politician puking out Russian propaganda. Why do conservatives vote for this? What a complete and total joke.

The IRS has been intentionally underfunded for decades. Attempts to increase the funding creates pushback from voters. If the public had a positive reception to proper funding of government agencies they'd get it. The public does not have a positive reception to government and therefore reward when goverment is set up to fail. Somewhat true. Politicians play to this the best they can which exacerbates the problem. But voters are adults and if a politician appeals to them with lines like "climate change is a hoax created by China" and they respond positively, that's on the voter. We let voters off the hook for obviously stupid decisions because politicians are easy to blame, but let's be honest: grifting politicians aren't hard to spot.

His sister, presumably a reason for some of his interest in Nebraska, is transferring from the Volleyball program.

Of course I did, but his line of "incompetence" led me to believe he places more blame on the Biden Administration. I could be wrong in that. Pipelines or leases on Federal land wouldn't help. Pipelines take years to develop and don't net add production, but it can lower the costs for transportation. Leases on Federal land don't help because Companies aren't that eager to explore for new projects. They would likely be stranded assets in a few short years. Most people agree that with the rise of electric vehicles, the demand for gas is going to fall dramatically by the mid 2030s. For your second paragraph, I largely agree. But one thing people need to realize is that politicians respond to the desires of voters, our government is incompetent because voters want it that way.

It's amusing that 2/3s of COVID Relief spending was under Trump, but Biden is blamed for inflation regardless. You don't think it has anything to do with high demand post COVID and the difficulty of companies meeting that demand? Companies relied on Just In Time Manufacturing to meet demand, usually on the backs of cheap labor. Workers have realized that wages at $10 dollars an hour simply isn't worth wasting 40 hours of your week to earn. Additionally, a lot of the supply chain issues are international. Biden cannot simply buy more semiconductors to build more cars. Furthermore, energy - one of the highest contributors of inflation - are commodities with international prices. There isn't much Biden or anybody can do to lower them.

Considering the ease and effortless nature of vaccines, we can start there. Frankly we can lower costs dramatically and pass a form of Universal Healthcare but Republicans don't want that. Furthermore, I propose letting each state have a referendum on issues they don't like. Let the voters decide: do you want woke Universities in your state to receive research dollars? Do you want your students to receive Pell grants when they go to a liberal-brainwashing University? Do you want pesky the government oversight that comes with farm subsidies? Do you want wasteful government spending to go to your states roads, public schools, or infrastructure? I don't want Democrats to unilaterally take money away, but let voters in Red states decide. I don't see why we have to continually force them to do things they dislike. Give all that money to states or places that want it. We can even set up a repayment plan for states like Kentucky to repay the Federal Government all that money they've been taking. They can pick themselves up by their bootstraps and figure out a way to function independently.

Coming from the Rural guy who doesn't believe in Climate Change caused by people, hilarious. As for the story, it was interesting. Anti-intellectualism has been a mainstay of the Right for decades, Donald Trump simply weaponized it to get votes. If Americans in rural states don't want to get vaccines, trust environmental scientists, or take part in research, don't make them. But charge them more for health insurance because they're higher risk, restrict government reach money to their universities leaving the states devoid of talent that attracts businesses, etc. We should stop trying to drag Rural people kicking and screaming into reality.

It's a shame we have to treat Republicans and their voters as something to be taken seriously. They're nothing more than a Party that uses idiotic culture war nonsense to cut taxes for the wealthy and keep them in power. They should be treated as such by every news outlet in the world. There needs to be a serious party to counter Democrats, not the absolute joke that the Republican Party is. Oh well, they're going to win off the back of CRT, Trans men playing sports, and education being bad. Voters get what they deserve with this.

Correct. I would argue our electoral structure makes it a lot easier to pull off. Republicans are slowly turning the country into their own personal version of Wisconsin - where Republicans receive fewer votes but Dominate the state House, Senate and Judiciary. American democracy is uniquely unable to defend itself against the a hoard of zealot Republicans. In 2018, for example, Democrats won 53% of the popular vote compared to 44.75% for Republicans. That huge popular vote victory allowed Dems to cut into the SUPERMAJORITY Republicans enjoyed. Post election, the state Assembly was 64% R, 36% D. They're going to try to do this with the whole country. Florida is no longer a 50/50 state, just like Iowa and Ohio. They're long gone. Democrats have pursued aggressive gerrymanders on California and New York, so I'm not sure this Tweet is fair. Of course, one party is actually serious about ranked choice voting and banning gerrymanders and the other is trying to figure out how how maximize the authoritarian elements of their party to seize power.

My basis is predicated entirely on elections. "Abolish ICE" is an idea that would cost Democrats more than "Defund the Police" in 2020. Their electoral position is already in a catastrophic place for the foreseeable future, there is no need to intentionally step on an Electoral landmine with "abolish ICE" in their platform. As for the agency itself, I don't have much of an opinion. Pre-2003 it wasn't different, they simply combined several offices and agencies under a larger, unified structure. Missions served by INS moved to the new ICE and so on. Abolishing it wouldn't accomplish anything. The mission would simply be passed onto other DHS agencies, like CBP, TSA or USCIS.

The totality of his tenure as Head Coach will put him out of a job in 2023.